About your Search

20130126
20130203
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
is as qualified as panetta or someone like gates. i did it will be interesting to see what happens. the pentagon is non favorable to of theck hehagels world. the trick is how you manage the massive bureaucracy, and that will be the biggest challenge. i think it will be an experiment in management. tavis: let me go back to hillary clinton. if she is on the ballot and everyone thinks she will be, the conventional wisdom if she decides to run, the nomination is hers. you have heard that before. i digress on that point. where the affairs are concerned, what is your assessment of her readiness to be president? >> i think the readiness is a no-brainer. i think she is ready to be president. i would take issues with a lot of reform policies. i think it is hawkish and almost neo conservatives in a lot of ways. if she is a woman and has to take those positions, i thing she believes that clip talking about the killing of gaddafi, we came and killed him. i thought, that is not the type of message i want my world leaders to be presented. all that being said, i think she is ready for the job. she is a beloved
military brass. question, will the new pentagon policy on women in combat adversely affect military readiness? yes or no. susan ferrechio. >> i think the jury is still out. it is interesting what some in the military have said, that it could be a problem, create tension on the front lines. i think what senator mccain said, if you read closely his comments, we still have to maintain our superlative status as a military, and we can't let policy changes get in the way. of course, i empathize with women who want to be on the front lines fighting but i think first and foremost we have to preserve our superior military and make sure this doesn't change that dynamic in some way, which it could. >> susan, did you see that list it of countries that now have women in this role? >> you've got the number one military in the role. not those countries. our military. >> because women are excluded? >> no, because we've managed to stay number one, and i'm saying we need to stay number one and not let policy changes get in the way. >> women have proven themselves on the battlefield in the nature of w
, manufacturers who make things for the pentagon cut back production sharply-- defense spending fell 22% in the latest g.d.p. report, tipping the economy into the red. >> certainly manufacturers are pulling back and i think this is a bit of a wake up call that these cuts are real and that they have real effects on the economy. >> reporter: economists and markets did not panic over the drop into the red, because the economy is still showing signs of solid growth. businesses are still buying equipment and software. housing continues to bounce back. and consumer spending held up well, expanding at an annual rate of 2.2%. >> so if you look through some of the volatile components, demand underneath was solid and it doesn't suggest the economy is losing momentum. so a scary headline number isn't as bad as it seems when you look underneath. >> reporter: and that's what economists say federal reserve policy makers did. after studying the economy for two days, chairman ben bernanke and his colleagues issued what most called a "no news" statement. the fed says it will keep interest rates near zer
mirrors and the rearview face pentagon cameras. is this a play on autos? >> tas play on ought owners but it's also a play on againtex, which has a competitive advantage. they have more than 80% market share and only about 20% of companies have auto dimming mirrors right now. there's some regulation that could help them as well. >> tom: then it's got the rearview-facing cameras which i have to admit make me sea sick when i use them but they're awfully helpful in the driveway. >> completely agree on both fronts. >> tom: do you have any positioning in the two stocks we mentioned here tonight? >> i do not. >> tom: we have energy and auto parts with heather brilliant, the global equity research director at morning star. >> susie: over a 100 million people are expected to watch the baltimore ravens battle the san francisco 49ers in the superbowl. many people don't just tune in for the football, but also the commercials. so, advertisers are going all out to make sure their spots get a lot of buzz, even before the big game. erika miller reports on whether the multimillion dollar expense is w
, the agencies, primarily the pentagon and the c.i.a. nominate people to be on the list. and it goes through what the white house promises is a very rigorous process of review to determine if those people should or should not be on the list. we don't know exactly what the standard is. but it involves a number of criteria, including whether the host country, the country in which this person, particular person is cooperative or not vis-À-vis capturing the person. in any event, they have a standard. names are nominated. it goes through an interagency process. and finally it makes it to the president. and he makes the final decision who is or is not on the list. does that sound like what you understand? >> i think that's certainly what the government has said happens. and, of course, this is the problem is that the only thing that we ever know about the counterintelligence stuff over the last 10 or 11 years has been, you know, what the government has been forced to say, what journalists have been able to find out, or what human rights organizations like ours have been able to find out on the ground.
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)